I had a bit of a spat on Twitter earlier. Actually it turned into quite a good debate, or as much of one as you can have with 140 characters at a time! It was with a couple of people who probably very proudly describe themselves as ‘English nationalists’; who believe England should reassert itself as a sovereign nation state again.
I, however, am a Unionist. I am proud to be from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I consider myself as British first and then English. The UK is my country, and being English born, half Scots (on my mother’s side) and with Welsh heritage on my father’s side (gwyn is the Welsh word for white) it makes me appreciate the different cultures, traditions and histories from right across our island nation.
The opening criticism on Twitter was that I had done nothing as an English MP to speak up for England in Parliament and that, in particular, we need an English Parliament to address the imbalance in the devolution settlement. I might be wrong, but I really do not think there is an appetite for a further layer of governance in England, no matter how powerful the case can be made (and it can) for a federal UK.
Our debate moved on to the ‘unfairness’ of having Scottish MPs as both Prime Minister and Chancellor (and presumably International Development Secretary too). I just don’t buy the argument that because Scotland and Wales have devolved structures that Scottish and Welsh Westminster MPs shouldn’t have key roles in any United Kingdom government – particularly in the cases cited, given they are UK and not ‘English’ ministerial positions.
Shouldn’t England have its own Secretary of State they argued. But what is the point when most of the remaining Cabinet positions oversee English-only departments? We have a Cabinet full of English Secretaries of State.
Personally, I feel these issues are mere distractions. Yes there is a case for reform at Westminster to address the so-called West Lothian question. I’m not sure that ‘English votes on English issues’ is as easy to do as some suggest because often there are clauses in Bills which relate to other parts of the UK too, but I will keep an open mind on it! I certainly do agree, though, that changes are needed.
Then there is the prickly subject of the Barnet Formula – whereby Scotland is allocated a very generous grant each year by the UK parliament. That probably will take a whole separate post!
Where I did completely agree with my two ‘nationalist’ friends, was the need for the English to rediscover their proud heritage and traditions; something the Scots, Welsh and Irish seem much better at celebrating. Tameside Council, which is one of my local authorities, does its bit every 23 April, with St George’s flags festooned everywhere, red roses handed out to the public, and stickers and badges for all school children in the borough. They’ve even launched a campaign for St George’s Day to be recognized as a public holiday – again, something I fully support. We do have a long history as a nation so let’s at least start to celebrate that a bit more!
Since posting my article, Conservative (and Unionist) PPC, Rene Kinzett, has written an interesting – and equally provocative – piece on the same subject here.
Since I am one of those people you were having a “spat” with and yes an English Nationalist and proud of it I suppose I should answer you. I am English and only English.
It is noticeable that you do not refute the fact that you have done nothing to speak up for England or the English in Parliament. You are not alone in it however and I notice when asked at the time you could not even say when the last time you mentioned England or the English in Parliament was.
The Union as currently constituted because of devolution to the other home nations is unsustainable. English people, like me and many others I know, are in general becoming increasingly bitterly angry at English MPs pandering to minorities without taking our country and the effects these things have into consideration.
My comment re the PM and Chancellor being Scottish was not about fairness. It was a statement of fact that whilst Scotland has its own Parliament it also has the two most powerful positions in the cabinet held by Scottish MPs. The fact other posts are held by English MPs is irrelevant when they speak about things like Health that are devolved issues in terms of British when they know they are speaking about English matters only.
Yes England indeed should have its own Secretary of State. Your argument is specious. The other Home Nations specifically have someone at Cabinet level to speak up for them irrespective of how many of their MPs are in the Cabinet and the fact they have their own Parliaments. Why should the same not apply to England?
Not being personally involved in the internal workings of Parliament it is difficult to argue one way or the other whether English votes for English laws is easy or not. However if Parliament does not grasp the nettle and deal with these matters resentment amongst the English can only grow. We are already seeing some of the effects of this with the English Defence League.
The only reason to keep the Barnett Formula in its present form is to buy off Scottish votes and hope to keep the Union intact. However since even Lord Barnett says it should go it cannot be defended.
I am pleased to see you support St Georges Day being made a National Holiday. How about a motion in the House of Commons to that effect? Whilst you are at it add in that St Georges Cross should be flown from every public building in England.
If the “spat” did nothing else it as least got you to mention England in a blog of this type. Maybe we are making progress no matter how slowly.
I do not accept that there is kind of desire for an English only parliament and for sure we do not need MORE government we need less (sorry if that offends the socialist in you Mr Gwynne). I do however support St George’s day(He is afterall my namesake) as a national holiday and perhaps it would go some way to restoring our national pride. Something is very lacking in our society.
Absolutely. That’s actually the point I make in my own post – like you, I sense no appetite for a further layer of governance in England.
There is absolutely no need for their to be another “layer of governance” if English MPs only vote on English matters.
My problem with your statement is this, The English need to get fairer treatment, the Scots, Welsh, and NI get better treatment than the English people. We pay over the odds for prescriptions, Scottish people pay half price, We have to pay for uni education, Scots dont.
Brown signed the document so Scotland could begin devolution, as a mp with a Scottish constituency.
The English have everything stripped from them, the rest of the UK dont. Even saying your English is classed as racism, Scottish folk say it all the time, even Cameron states he has Scottish blood in his veins. Is that not racist in its self, what about his English Blood.
English people no matter what creed or colour, get treated different from even migrants and immigrants.
There may be clauses in bills that are lawfully hard to change. No excuse they can be got around, the bill could be split. Laws change everyday at the whim of government, surely the bills can have amendments. Poor excuses.
No need for another layer of governance, because English Mps will vote on English matters, just like only Scottish mps vote on Scottish matters.
The people of England are waking up slowly and when they awake the English lion will roar and government will have to change to suit the people, not itself.
England a constituent nation of the UK has had nothing “stripped” from her. All these comments from Little Englanders are just emotional piffle, more telling of their own view of themselves in the world as about the state of the nation of England. Most English people get on with their lives, are industrious, open and fair minded and are glad that the Union with Scotland (and the much older coupling with Wales), as well as the continuing importance of Northern Ireland, gives our Sovereign Nation State of the United Kingdom a total far greater than the sum of its parts – whether in terms of economic prosperity, international significance, a proud military tradition and a diverse cultural mix.
England, by far the most populous nation in the UK, is secure both in its own existence and its role in the family of nations in the British Isles. Due to its size, it does not need the special recognition afforded to both Wales and Scotland, with their (albeit diminished) existence at the Cabinet table. England feels no real need to “regional assemblies” and there is no popular movement for any form of English Parliament. The self-confidence and strength of the English nation is shown through its rejection of petty nationalism and tribal delinquency. England is a mature nation, having decided long ago to move beyond its borders and create a Great Britain and a United Kingdom.
The success of the UK as a collection of uniquely individual and often competing (not just on the sports field) nations is a wonder to behold, especially given the sad experiences in other parts of the globe when experiments to hold nations together within a sovereign state collapse into anarchy and warfare. That is the key with the United Kingdom. Whilst its creation at times owed more to the sword than the ballot box, it is the consent of the peoples of these islands that holds the Union together now and in the future.
Haven’t you heard the phrase “if it aint broke don’t fix it” There is absolutely no point in an English only parliament. I cannot think of a single good reason to even consider it.
Whatever the faults of the English nationalists, as you see them, at least they are proposing a solution.
You, on the other hand, can recognise that there is a problem, but have no clue what to do about it. Perhaps you ought to turn your mind to it.
Andrew MacKinlay (Thurrock, Labour) recently stated that the Labour Party did not want to discuss the West Lothian Question (Hansard, 2nd February 2009). The reason for this reluctance, he suggested, was because “my colleagues present arguments about needing votes from Scotland”. In other words, don’t ask it. The 2008 Hansard Audit of Political Engagement found that the constitutional issue that most people were dissatisfied with was “Scottish MPs being able to vote on English issues in the House of Commons”, yet this most salient of constitutional issues is precisely the issue that Labour fails to address or even discuss. The West Lothian Question and the voting privileges of Scottish MPs were not mentioned once in the recent Governance of Britain green paper ‘Rights and Responsibilities: developing our constitutional framework’. Not once in 64 pages.
Personally I think you’re playing a dangerous game by leaving this matter unaddressed.
Jack Straw has outlined his opposition by stating that “I am wholly opposed to an English parliament. If you went down that route, there would be little advantage seen by those in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for maintaining the Union, because the argument would be, what exactly is in it for us?” (Western Mail, May 2008). Not only opposed to an English parliament, but wholly opposed because there would be nothing in it for the Scots, Welsh and Irish. Fair enough, we’ve covered the views of you and Jack Straw, but what about the views of the other 50M people in England; are the views of the people of England as important as those of the Government and the people of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?
Well, are they; should the people of England have the choice? If you’re so sure that there is no appetite for it, why not ask them?
Former Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, Charles Falconer, went a step further than Jack Straw and yourself; he stated that “there is no demand at all for devolution to England or the English MPs only being able to vote on English issues.” (Today Programme, March 2006) and further declared “So the idea of an English Parliament, we say: not today, not tomorrow, not in any kind of future we
can see“. (speech to the ESRC Devolution and Constitutional Change Programme, March 2006 ).
But what are the facts? The Department for Constitutional Affairs (now the Ministry of Justice), of which Lord Falconer was head, has never commissioned any research into the level of support for an English parliament
or English votes on English Laws. And by never, I mean never; not once, not ever. All the commercial polls have found a majority in favour of an English dimension to government, whether it is an English Parliament, English Votes on English Laws, English independence or a combination of the three.
Why is it that Gordon Brown, when he talks about devolved areas such as Health and Education, never makes any reference to England. Instead he uses phrases such as ‘this country’, ‘our schools’ or ‘the country’s hospitals’. My country has a name. It’s name is England. Why not say “England” when it is England’s schools and hospitals that are being discussed?
Why do you not insist upon this, and why do you not object that – according to the Holtham Commission figures – Scotland is over-funded to the tune of £4.5bn a year at the expense of your own constituents?
Flutter the Cross of St George by all means, but don’t kid yourself that you have the interests of England at heart to the same extent that members of the Scottish Labour Party have the interests of Scotland at heart. You English MPs have let England down badly, very badly indeed. And the sad thing is that it will be the BNP that will benefit from your neglect – that is something that you will have to live with.
I find it extraordinary that your Government puts so much time and effort into Britishness, and emblazons the Scottish and Welsh flags across its literature, but does nothing, nothing at all, to foster an inclusive civic English national identity. Shame on you.
Just what I was going to say.
As someone who identifies far more powerfully with humanity as a whole than with a single petty nation or constituent country, I do wonder what all the fuss is about.
Particularly given that English MPs in English seats control about five sixths of the sovereign body in all the land. One would think that, if anything, the devolved bodies were still at a disadvantage – they can be over-ruled by the English-dominated Parliament at any point!
Not that I’m arguing for greater devolution. It seems only to excite unpleasant nationalistic tendencies.
Rene Kinzett is wrong in his assertion from Wales that England is a constituent Nation of the UK. The UK is now described as Nations and Regions.The main political parties all follow New Labour’s example of refusing to say “England”. England is not even represented on the british council. denigrating people as little Englanders is a well worn term of abuse used by suppos-ed unionists and we are used to it. I doubt Kinzett would have the courage to call the SNP or Plaid little welshers or scotlanders. It makes no odds any way, the sentiment of public in England is for an English Parliament so what Kinzett and Gwynne thinks is of no importance.
This myth that ‘another layer of governance’ will be created by an English Parliament must be dispelled.
Create an English parliament of less MP’s than at present(say 400)let them sit in Westminster (no new building required)
Create a UK Federation.
Have Federal representatives of all four UK nations, sit in the Federal Parliament to debate Federal issues. This could be housed in the second chamber as and when required.
Despite Rene Kinzett’s bluster, above. The truth is England is the country that no longer exists in the eyes of Labour (and indeed most establised politicians)
When did anyone in Government ever use the word England? It doesn’t, not even when talking about policy affecting England only.
The Government knows the current Devolution settlement is wrong, as does the Opposition. But they are all too scared to admit it. They wish to preserve a Union that is already dead.
All we in England are seeking is, fairness, equality and Democracy.
Rene
You are wrong that there is no popular movement for and English Parliament. In fact every poll done on this issue shows a huge majority of English people in favour of such a proposal and a referendum on it.
Indeed if you look at the Power2010 blog that is taking votes on different kinds of reform you will see that English votes for English laws is the 5th most popular reform that people demand.
Also England as a Sovereign nation state is not even recognized within the EU. In fact England is the only country NOT recognized.
As far as being a Little Englander is concerned. Is a Scottish person a Little Scottish because the want the best for their nation? Is a Welsh person a Little Welsher because they want the best for their Nation? Is a Northern Irish person a Little Northern Irisher because they want the best for their Nation? I think that statement says more about you than it does about any “Little Englander.”
Rene Kinzet presumably thinks like so many Big Britishers that “Little Englander” is some kind of insult. It’s not, it’s a compliment. I am proud to be a little Englander. The original “Little Englanders” were mocked for not wanting to expand the “British” empire – which in the fullness of time has proved itself to a position of honour.
I am English and only English.
England is not secure in it’s existence. England is being balkanised into “regions” without consultation or consent. Actually not 100% true there was a referendum in the “north east” of England where regional government was completely rejected – and yet we have an England carved into regions and unelected regional government in the for of Labour’s Regional Grand Committees.
The argument that England is ok because the majority of UK parliament MPs are based in England has proved itself a fallacy time and time again. Their loyalty lies not with England, not even with their constituents but with the UK and their political parties. This is demonstrated in their complete inability to even say the word England, even when talking about obviously English issues. If those MPs were loyal to England or their constituents we wouldn’t have the Barnett Formula, paid for tuition fees and all the other disadvantages the English get. The primary objective of UK MPs is to keep the Union together Cameron’s “better an imperfect union than a broken union” – as far as they’re concerned dealing England a permanently bad deal is a price worth paying.
Why should the English pay? England can manage just fine, much better in fact as an independent nation.
Yes I use the word English emotionally. Emotionally because the reality is there is no England. A nation without a parliament is no nation. This is particularly insulting to the English as we produced one of if not the first parliament and created a template for liberty exported round the world. England has been abolished without the consent of the people. English nationalists want our parliament and our nation back.
Rene Kinzett like so many politicians has his head firmly ensconced in the ground on this issue. There is rising resentment in England about how we are treated. He is welcome to call it piffle. He’s wrong, and as time proved the original “Little Englanders” to be of sound judgement, history will prove that the modern Little Englanders are right too.
In summary – two fingers to your union and home rule for England. A parliament is not enough, in increasing numbers the English want out.
Mr Kinzett, Your job depends on the Union so of course you support keeping we”little Englanders “in our place,you think of yourself as Welsh ,well good for you,try and get the Welsh to give up their Parliament then,and come back to the “British Parliament” England must have a Parliament,and then perhaps the “English?”MPs in the “British”Parliament will dare to speak her name.
Rene, you are wrong, I may get emotional over England, And as an Englishman that is my right, I am a English Civic Nationalist, I believe that England is being stripped of her greatness, even something like the Cadbury takeover, hurts our country, or should I say my country, as you don’t believe that England should have her own identity, Kraft got the remainder of the money to buy Cadbury from a loan by The Royal Bank Of Scotland group, funny how they still owe the people of the union money via government, so that is fair, people will lose jobs, maybe homes, will the unionist government, led by a man who signed for the devolution of Scotland, have bailed out banks, but the people still are losing jobs , homes , etc.
We have to pay for Scotland to have their 4.3 billion overpayment, via our higher council taxes, prescriptions, 80% of the union is English, so we are paying for the rest of the union to have all the perks, free education, free prescriptions, better community care, better hospitals, shall I go on, apart from pockets of poverty in Scotland and Wales the people are better off, the amount of poverty and misuse of cash in England overshadows them by far, 4.3 billion, could make someone’s life better in England, instead it bolsters Scotland and cushions the people with the perks they receive.
England will wake up and realise they are getting a worse deal than the rest of the union, and will do something about it.
And for little Englanders, England are a big nation, with big population, when they wake up and smell the roses in the garden of England, I hope people like you eat those words.
Not to throw a spanner in the works here but shouldn’t the question be ‘are we European more than we are British’?
The English vs British questions is so colonial and within a generation I guarantee the argument will be European vs British.
Lol! Honestly Joseph, that really does put a spanner in the works!
I take no issue with you personally, your views are in my opinion exactly that ~ your views. You do not represent me or my views in any way, I didn’t vote for your party nor am I ever likely to. Be that as it may I do have an opinion on what it is to be English. It seems to me that saying one is English and proud of it is seen as being racist these days. As a born and bred Londoner I grew up with people from many different backgrounds, most of whom were good decent people. This does not mean that I shouldn’t acknowledge my own heritage, and I object to being made to feel bad if I do so. It is high time we were able to celebrate St George’s Day without apology and it is high time we stopped all the pc nonsense that surrounds Christian festivals such as Christmas (or would you prefer that I call it the Winter Celebration?)after all we are happy to celebrate Diwalhi without renaming it.
Joseph I am English not British and ABSOLUTELY NEVER European.
Joseph, unless someone has the balls to put power back to Westminster where it belongs, that would never be a question.:)
When someone I meant lol
For those of you who havent already you should join the other 1124 English Patriots who have signed up to The English Claim of Right.
Give England a voice
http://www.englishclaimofright.com/
You say that because some Cabinet positions oversee English-only departments we don’t need a Secretary of State for England, but you neglect to point out that though some Cabinet positions’ remit extends only to England the MPs appointed to those positions are elected to the UK parliament and therefore their duty is to the UK and not to England. It’s like the UK parliament sending someone up to Scotland to be their minister for housing or education.
IMarcher And the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland represents… St. Helens in Merseyside. The point is that, around the Cabinet table, there are ‘British’ ministerial posts (Foreign Sec, Chancellor, PM, DfID sec, Defence Sec., etc) and there are posts which relate to English-only departments: DCSF, Transport, DWP, Health etc. Pre-devolution, it was the always Scottish Secretary who oversaw the NHS in Scotland, not the English Health Secretary.
Agree with FloTom, sign the petition and join voices to gain the respect and rights that the people of England deserve.
Also join the CEP: http://englishparliament.net/campaign-english-parliament
Lots of facts and reasons why England should have her own parliament.
Scottish MPs can vote for rules and bills that affect England, but English MPs can not reciprocate in the arena of Holyrood home of the Scottish parliament, nor the Welsh assembly nor will they be able to in NI.
But unionists think this is fair.
Andrew granted but NI are going down the devolution route like Wales and Scotland, so the English MPs will not have a say.
And the Scottish secretary always reported to Westminster, now they report to Holyrood.
Do you go to Holyrood to vote on Scottish matters?
No, I go to Westminster to vote on Scottish issues… those not devolved. And Holyrood (and Cardiff Bay) are not sovereign bodies. Westminster is. They get their powers solely from Westminster, and -if the devolution Acts were repealed by Westminster- those powers could return. The Scottish and Welsh Secretaries report to the Westminster Parliament.
Andrew, if you have to vote on Scottish matters that include crucial areas such as the NHS, Education, Policing and Social Services… why do you think it is acceptable for Scots MPs to interfere in matters that only affect your constituents?
Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling, don’t represent a single voter (Scottish or English) when it comes to the NHS and Education. You can’t think this is acceptable to your voters, do you?
Because of the delicate and unique situation in Northern Ireland, having an “outsider” as Secretary of State can be justified on grounds of impartiality and fairness. It’s much harder to justify having a Welsh secretary who isn’t Welsh or a Scottish secretary who isn’t Scottish or indeed a PM who isn’t English (or at least doesn’t represent an English constituency) as the majority of legislation that he/she passes through the rubber stamp parliament wouldn’t affect their own constiuency.
Ok its good to learn,
So if the devolution for NI goes through, will that not push for England to have its own assembly.
And if what you say is true, why does Scotland have its own bills voted for in Holyrood, did you get a say in them, as with the Welsh bills passed in Cardiff bay?
The un devolved issues you vote on will they be devolved?
So if you can only vote on the issues that are not devolved, why do the Scottish mps,msps,meps get to vote on all issues that affect England, do you think this is fair?
Hi Andrew,
Like you, I am half-Scottish, and for that reason I supported devolution to a Scottish Parliament.
But unlike you, I also believe that the English Question needs to be addressed. It cannot be democratic that Labour MPs from Scotland and Wales are able to determine policy in England on health and education services. We have ‘tuition top-up fees’and ‘foundation hospitals’ in England (whether one agrees with those policies or not) ONLY because Labour MPs from Scotland and Wales voted for them, policies from which their own constituents were exempt.
The Tory policy ‘English Votes for English Laws’ ia hugely popular with the English electorate but many believe it will be too cumbersome. As you will know it was considered by Gladstone as the ‘In and Out’ solution to Home Rule, and was rejected for that reason.
An English Parliament is the only fair solution – at least it should offered in a referendum to the people of England. As others have told you, it need NOT mean ‘another layer of government’. The former Tor leader in the Lords, the Marquis of Salisbury, proposed long ago that the House of Commons should become the English Parliament and the House of Lords an elected British Parliament. This would mean one layer less for English domestic legislation. Moreover, it would require no new buildings and would cost very little.
Consider also your attachment to the Union. It is a union of nations. In the 21st century that should rest on the consent of the people. See Article I, International Covenant on International and Political Rights (1976. If you are Unionist who believes in democracy you should allow the British nations to vote on the continuation of the Union.
For those who like to snipe at ‘Little Englanders’ (I rarely read of ‘Little Scotlanders) consider what the alternative is: Greater Englanders, that is those Unionists who wish to hang on at all costs to the English empire in the British Isles and keep repeating that ‘Britain punches above its weight’ because ‘we are stronger together’. Would Little Englanders have invaded Iraq? What we would defend are our basic English liberties, which are under increasing threat from overmighty British governments and European bureaucrats.
Why do people feel the need to tell us they have scotch dads, welsh mams, an irish wolfhound, they holiday in france, I have mixed parentage aswell, my mam was a woman and me dad was a bloke, but I am not half woman, I am a bloke, i serve one master and I am English, whether I had foreign ancestors or not, I AM ENGLISH, its not rocket science.
The issues that are not devolved apply to the whole of Britain and therefore all MPs should vote on them. There is clearly no parrallel between this and other Home Nation MPs voting on things that do NOT apply to their own constituents.
As for the Devolution Acts whether they can be repealed is a moot point. Westminster would never get away with repealing them as the other Home Nations public would NOT allow it. Therefore when these other Parliaments were established Westminster effectively gave up its sovereignty.
Another specious argument Andrew you really must do better than this. I know Politicians think the English are stupid but dont fall for it.
If I come up with some Interview Questions based on you blog piece and responses to it would you be willing to participate and I will post to my blog, would you be happy with this, and The questions wont be slating to wards you just honest questions that need Honest answers?
“I might be wrong, but I really do not think there is an APPETITE for a further layer of governance in England..”
There’s that word again!! Are you all reading from the same script??
Lord Falconer said it:
“Insisting that there was no public appetite for a separate English parliament, he (Lord Falconer) said………..”
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/mary-dejevsky/mary-dejevsky-why-we-need-an-english-parliament-469806.html
Other MP’s /think tanks etc. say it and yet none of them have got the guts to suggest the question be put to a vote (referendum)!
Polls show that there is demand for an English Parliament:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6264823.stm
Perhaps British politicians think that of they say it often enough English people will believe that its true!
An analogy:
Dear English Football Association
As a representative of the Scottish Football Association, I would like to inform you that we wish to change the way the English Football team is managed to bring it more in line with the way our Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, is running Britain.
This will involve the following:
1. The Manager of the Scottish team is allowed to be involved with the running of the English team. However, the manager of the English team should have no say whatsoever in the running of the Scottish team. This shall be known as the West Lothian Question.
2. A sizable proportion of any money the English Football Association raises from, say sponsorship or crowd takings, shall be given to the Scottish Football Association, regardless as to whether you need it or not. This does not apply the other way round. This is known as the Barnett Formula.
3. You are not to call yourself England any longer. You will now be known as the British Regions. We, on the other hand, are still to be known as Scotland, “a proud and noble nation”.
4. Medical treatment to your players will be limited to a few treatments because of cost. No such stringent limitation applies to Scotland.
5. If your playing surfaces are flooded, then do not expect much assistance. However, Scottish pitches will be adequately provided for in the event of flooding.
6. From this moment on, the English Football Association will cease to exist. However, the Scottish Football Association will be allowed to continue to work independently.
A failure to follow these rules will see you branded as arrogant, selfish and unfair.
I’m sure you will find this to your satisfaction. After all, you seem to be happy with this state of affairs with your political system, so why not your Football team?
Yours sincerely
Mr G Brown.
PS You English are so naïve, you are being abolished and don’t even realise it.
Ref: http://www.thecep.org.uk
http://www.englishparliament.net
Some of us will never be abolished mate, I am one of them.
QUOTE and -if the devolution Acts were repealed by Westminster- those powers could return.
END QOUTE
Andrew stop it! I nearly fell off my chair with laughter.
As if you subserviant MP’s would defy Gordon and seek to reclaim Scotland to the Westminster fold. Cripes!i would like to see you try it. The Scottish hordes would be across the border in a trice, armed to the teeth.
Face the facts, in 1998 Blair let the Devolution genie out of the bottle and it ain’t going back.
Do you remember Blair’s words? I do. ‘Devolution for Scotland will stop the SNP in it’s tracks’
Whoops! there i go again, nearly off my chair.
[...] Welsh Conservative Councillors View of England Having Own Parliament Welsh councillor René Kinzett’s http://www.renekinzett.com/2010/02/in-defence-of-union.html response to a blog by Andrew Gwynne Labour MPhttp://thinkpolitics.co.uk/andrewgwynne/?p=54 [...]
Andrew, we need equality, that is all. Either give us the chance to vote for an English Parliament, or…
1. create 30 additional seats in the Scottish Pareliament to be returned from English constituencies.
2. have the First Minister and Finance Minister from these English MSPs
3. The First Minister would not be validated by an election: he would be there because he thinks it’s “his turn”
4.The Finance Minister would hold that position because he is the First Minister’s mate.
They could be sure that every measure they proposed for the Scottish people would have an automatic 20-odd% of votes in their favour, courtesy of the 30 non-Scottish MSPs.
Oh, and both would have to swear an Oath to hold England’s interests “paramount”.
Do you think there might be few voices of protest? Do you think the people of Scotland would feel a tad annoyed? Especially if something as essential as a tertiary education tax went against the will of the Scots MSPs because of it?
“The Scottish and Welsh Secretaries report to the Westminster Parliament.”
methinks you are bing a bit obtuse Mr Gwynne. You know full well Scotland has a whole own parliament of its own and so, effectively, do Wales and NI. And yet their MP’s can still interfer in Englands business and they do in spades. Brown is a Scottish MP and so is Darling. In equity, why on earth should they be allowed to have anything to do with the internal governance of England now that there is a Scottish parliament.
I suspect the blythe way you dismiss the very basic democratic argument for English parliamentary representation has a lot to do with Labour’s own position in the British parliament- it didn’t need to. Labour could have introduced a bill for an EP just like Scotland’s and gained the credit for it by anti-Englishness of the sort you epitomise, won over.
By the way, your phrase
“Then there is the prickly subject of the Barnet Formula – whereby Scotland is allocated a very generous grant each year by the UK parliament. That probably will take a whole separate post!”
–so thats the Barnet debate supressed. How convenient.
I tend to Agree with Flotom,Toque, England.
England needs a parliament to vote on English issues, even if the start is under a federal union.
English people need some heritage and an identity, simples!!!!!!!!!!!
“And Holyrood (and Cardiff Bay) are not sovereign bodies. They get their powers solely from Westminster, and -if the devolution Acts were repealed by Westminster- those powers could return”
The Empire may have past into history but the Imperialist mindset of Westminster runs on unreformed. You may think, Andrew, that you are merely stating fact, but in doing so you betray your attitude. It was precisely this type of overbearing condescension that led to pressure for the establishment of the Scottish Parliament, and unless you and others learn to live in the modern world you will set the scene for the eventual dissolution of the UK.
I’m from N. Ireland where, as you are more than likely aware, we have our own assembly, as do Scotland and Wales. Now to me, the fairest thing to do would be for each part of the UK, including England, to have their own assembly. And to have a much smaller Westminster. I have heard that this was discussed but the feeling of MPs was that there wasn’t enough public support for it. Now, I have to keep my cynical nature in check, because it would be very easy for me to start asking whether it was the public who didn’t support the idea or MPs who would loose a lot of their powers and remuneration. I would also remind people that there are far more English MPs that there are N.Irish, Welsh and Scottish, and that is how it should be because England has a far higher population. I believe that one solution been touted is for N.Irish, Welsh and Scottish MPs to be excluded from votes that just effect England. But then this leads to the position where English MPs are able to vote on bills that effect N.Ireland, Scotland and Wales but not vice versa. To be honest this is nothing new and we have had to put up with for years. As I have said before, to me the fairest thing is for England to have its own assembly. Even if it means doing away with the British Parliament and having a British government drawn from those local assemblies.
Scotland as a nation has no assembly mate, it has a parliament, its own, England as a nation has nothing, we are denied.
We want independence from this UK mate it has done nothing for us whatsoever. No offence meant however.
The “exra layer of government” argument is used against us regulary.We notice 9 regional assemblies layers of government is acceptable to new labour and no one ever questions the expensive brussels layer of government.
Are you willing to do the interview?
Of course I am
I will get the questions drawn up , they will be based on this blog and some of the comments, Thank you very much for the opportunity to hold my first interview on my blog.
non English MP’s vote on everything concerning England because England is not devolved at all. My link will take you to 105 pages of letters to the press on the English question from the last few years. I estimate that the same number again will have been published but not online.
All polls taken show that the English want their own Parliament. This prompted Frank Field NL to make an early day motion calling for an English Parliament.Perhaps you could argue your point with Frank.
I have just read the comments, from a spoilt Welsh person with their own parliament. (‘We’ve got one but you haven’t’ attitude) An MP who as usual has no understanding of the English, unless they live in Surrey and give to charity on a regular basis. Along with many other resons, this attitude from condescending ‘know better than you’ MP’s and Quango workers within the system, is the very reason that the English Defence League, BNP, UKIP & English Democrats are attracting the English voters. None of the other parties take what the Engish person thinks, seriously. They tell the English what they should do & think. A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP! More akin to Hitler than the BNP!!
I am Englisc, not British, I find the union flag offensive and a flag of occupation, i have scottish ministers making laws over my country and denying it the same rights that their own ones have, we have brown selling of bits of England to fund his deficit whilst not selling anything scotch, they have doctored the north sea boundary to appease scotch nationalists and bled England dry bailing out their banks, these bansks should now be renamed the Royal banks of England bearing in mind it it English taxpayers, the majority that have beailed them out. Many good scotch people support the call for an English parliament as they can see the discrimination against us and many also support our call for independence. Most English MP’s have done nnothing for England as a nation and sat by whilst theor scotch masters such as blair/brown/reid/alexander/darling/d,brown etc etc have dismantled and clevery destroyed our country, they want to gove us regional assembles whilst their own country has a parliament for the nation. These English MP’s are dhimmis themselves taking the easy road, not wanting to rock the boat or lose their positions with its perks (where else can you commit fraud and get away with it by paying some back and saying sorry) Traitors gate is still there and the lot of them should pay it a visit.England is waking up and will get a parliament with independence eventually, it will be interesting to see these dhimmis change their position in order to retain their pampered and privelidged lifestyle.
Got to say – I agree with every word of that.
[...] was an interesting debate on the Union over on Andrew Gwynne’s blog several weeks ago. Andrew is a decent Labour MP (yes, there are quite a few!) who writes an honest and thoughtful [...]
[...] you to Andrew Gwynne MP (click link for original blog by Andrew) for being honest in his answers, and to Toque for [...]